Why can't doctrine change?

[McCall1981]

Let me preface this question with two points. First, this question is hypothetical, and is NOT intended to imply anything about Pope Francis. Second, I stongly believe in all of the Church’s teachings on issues like these, so I am not questioning them at all, quite the opposite, I want to defend them.

So my understanding is that Church doctrine “cannot change” since it is part of the deposit of faith. This means that on issues like abortion, homosexuality, etc, the teachings of the Church can never change (I noticed Cardinal Dolan mentioned something about this during the conclave).

My question is, what exactly does it mean that doctrine “cannot change”? What would happen, for instance, if a Pope at some point said that abortion is now morally acceptable? What if he said it infallibly? What if the Church declared it at a Council?

My guess would be that the Pope, or Church, cannot change previously existing doctrine, so a statement that contradicts previously existing doctrine is automatically invalid.

Does anyone know?

 

[chimo]

Let me preface this question with two points. First, this question is hypothetical, and is NOT intended to imply anything about Pope Francis. Second, I stongly believe in all of the Church’s teachings on issues like these, so I am not questioning them at all, quite the opposite, I want to defend them.

So my understanding is that Church doctrine “cannot change” since it is part of the deposit of faith. This means that on issues like abortion, homosexuality, etc, the teachings of the Church can never change (I noticed Cardinal Dolan mentioned something about this during the conclave).

My question is, what exactly does it mean that doctrine “cannot change”? What would happen, for instance, if a Pope at some point said that abortion is now morally acceptable? What if he said it infallibly? What if the Church declared it at a Council?

My guess would be that the Pope, or Church, cannot change previously existing doctrine, so a statement that contradicts previously existing doctrine is automatically invalid.

Does anyone know?

First of all Church law can be quite different than the law of a nation. Church law cannot change but our understanding towards it can. A nation for instance that permits all kinds of abortions is in conflict with the Church when the faithful of that Church sees that this law cannot be binding to them. The Church will never bend its law to suit others. It stays by it. Having a scene where the Pope can change Church law could never happen. He is bound to defend it not change it. And if by hypothetical chance he tried to I believe he will not get that far in implementing it. Teachings of certain doctrines can change if for instance better understanding to it is establish. An example to a certain doctrine that has a better teaching today than it was in the past is the doctrine on Purgatory. While Purgatory is a true teaching, its understanding of it that we have today had to be developed throughout many centuries of Christian witness. Its teaching from 500 years ago is no way compared to its more refined teaching we have today.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

What would happen, for instance, if a Pope at some point said that abortion is now morally acceptable? What if he said it infallibly? What if the Church declared it at a Council?

That could never happen. We believe that God protects his Church from teaching error.

Note that the Church has had antipopes and corrupt popes but none has ever changed essential Church teachings.

 

[OraLabora]

That could never happen. We believe that God protects his Church from teaching error.

Note that the Church has had antipopes and corrupt popes but none has ever changed essential Church teachings.

Correct. If it happened, our reason to believe in the Church would evaporate. Fortunately in 2000 years it hasn’t happened. With that kind of track record I’m very optimistic for the future

 

[bzkoss236]

Let me preface this question with two points. First, this question is hypothetical, and is NOT intended to imply anything about Pope Francis. Second, I stongly believe in all of the Church’s teachings on issues like these, so I am not questioning them at all, quite the opposite, I want to defend them.

So my understanding is that Church doctrine “cannot change” since it is part of the deposit of faith. This means that on issues like abortion, homosexuality, etc, the teachings of the Church can never change (I noticed Cardinal Dolan mentioned something about this during the conclave).

My question is, what exactly does it mean that doctrine “cannot change”? What would happen, for instance, if a Pope at some point said that abortion is now morally acceptable? What if he said it infallibly? What if the Church declared it at a Council?

My guess would be that the Pope, or Church, cannot change previously existing doctrine, so a statement that contradicts previously existing doctrine is automatically invalid.

Does anyone know?

That can’t happen, because one of the conditions for something to be considered infallible is that it cannot contradict an already existing doctrine. There are certain conditions that have to be met for something to be considered infallible. I forget how many exactly, but here are the ones I can remember:

1. It must be declared ex-cathedra
2. It cannot contradict already existing doctrine
3. It must be an already held belief in the Church (i.e. it cannot be something that is just made up)

So, if he said that abortion was okay, since it violates one of the conditions, it is not an infallible statement, and therefore, cannot be held as doctrine.

 

[Genesis315]

If a Pope said something contrary to revealed truth, he would be wrong. It’s that simple. The Pope does not have the authority to alter the natural law or revealed truth–the people who want him to make him into God, which is blasphemous. Likewise, not everything the Pope utters becomes the law of belief for the Church.

Furthermore, if the Pope publically made a profession of faith in a non-Catholic religion (e.g. he converted to Lutheranism) or if he publically refused the infallible teaching authority of the Church (e.g. if he publically, explicitly, and obstinately refused to assent to, say, the definition of Christ’s two wills from Constantinople III), then he would cease to be a Catholic and Pope. Of course, since the Church as a whole is indefectible, the Holy Spirit would ensure she would recognize him as no longer her head (if the whole Church followed a false head, it would defect into schism).

If the Church definitively taught heresy or immorality (either through the Pope pronouncing ex cathdra, through a Council, through the bishops spread throughout the world, etc.) it would have defected in its mission to lead all towards salvation (heresy and immorality lead away from salvation), which is contrary to the promises of Christ. As such, we believe the Holy Spirit ensures this will never happen.

 

[sirach2v4]

dogma are the truths the church teaches that must be accepted by all.

doctine is teaching that can and has changed. The example clearest in my mind is the teaching on gambling. It was forbidden for centuries, up to and including the council of trent, but then was “pencil-whipped” until the issue went away. Basically you don’t hear anything negative about ordinary gambling, it’s not a sin. Excessive gambling may be a sin. for details, follow this link newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm

another case that comes to mind: male circumcision. It was required by Jewish law, but the requirement “went away” on the pages of the New Testament. If anything, St. Paul cautions people to NOT practice circumcision. Nowadays, it’s purely discretionary for parents to have their male child circumcised.

lower in ranking is the teaching about so-called special revelations. we are not required to believe in special revelations such as the alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary at Lourdes and at Fatima.

 

[Megan7]

That can’t happen, because one of the conditions for something to be considered infallible is that it cannot contradict an already existing doctrine. There are certain conditions that have to be met for something to be considered infallible. I forget how many exactly, but here are the ones I can remember:

1. It must be declared ex-cathedra
2. It cannot contradict already existing doctrine
3. It must be an already held belief in the Church (i.e. it cannot be something that is just made up)

So, if he said that abortion was okay, since it violates one of the conditions, it is not an infallible statement, and therefore, cannot be held as doctrine.

Thanks.

 

[CB_Catholic]

dogma are the truths the church teaches that must be accepted by all.

doctine is teaching that can and has changed. The example clearest in my mind is the teaching on gambling. It was forbidden for centuries, up to and including the council of trent, but then was “pencil-whipped” until the issue went away. Basically you don’t hear anything negative about ordinary gambling, it’s not a sin. Excessive gambling may be a sin. for details, follow this link newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm

another case that comes to mind: male circumcision. It was required by Jewish law, but the requirement “went away” on the pages of the New Testament. If anything, St. Paul cautions people to NOT practice circumcision. Nowadays, it’s purely discretionary for parents to have their male child circumcised.

lower in ranking is the teaching about so-called special revelations. we are not required to believe in special revelations such as the alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary at Lourdes and at Fatima.

I do not believe this is correct. Doctrine cannot change. What you are citing is a church discipline. Here is a recent answer from one of the apologists:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=767463

 

[godisgood77]

I do not believe this is correct. Doctrine cannot change. What you are citing is a church discipline. Here is a recent answer from one of the apologists:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=767463

So, Doctrine can not change…The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors.

However, the point that should be discussed, the one that has been a bone of contention over the centuries is what constitutes doctrine? If the deposit of faith limited to that taught by Jesus and the apostles, then there is a limited amount of teachings that would classify as doctrine.

The Church teaches that Divine revelation ended with the last apostle (St. John, in the late first century), so the most damaging charge that can be leveled against a theologian is that he introduced novelty. Therefore, in order for a teaching to classify as doctrine, it has to be at least implicit in the teachings of Jesus or the apostles, preferably explicit to avoid dangerous splits along the lines of interpretation… in summary, there really are not that many objective truths.

Think about how the church’s teaching on the possibility of salvation in and outside of the Church… that has changed…

Think about the Church’s teaching on religious liberty… that has changed…

Bottom line is that the Catholic faith is a living faith and has been since the beginning…

 

[CB_Catholic]

So, Doctrine can not change…The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors.

However, the point that should be discussed, the one that has been a bone of contention over the centuries is what constitutes doctrine? If the deposit of faith limited to that taught by Jesus and the apostles, then there is a limited amount of teachings that would classify as doctrine.

The Church teaches that Divine revelation ended with the last apostle (St. John, in the late first century), so the most damaging charge that can be leveled against a theologian is that he introduced novelty. Therefore, in order for a teaching to classify as doctrine, it has to be at least implicit in the teachings of Jesus or the apostles, preferably explicit to avoid dangerous splits along the lines of interpretation… in summary, there really are not that many objective truths.

Think about how the church’s teaching on the possibility of salvation in and outside of the Church… that has changed…

Think about the Church’s teaching on religious liberty… that has changed…

Bottom line is that the Catholic faith is a living faith and has been since the beginning…

IMO, this needs to be answered by someone who has training in the area and really knows what they are talking about. The priest apologist seemed to give a pretty clear and simple answer as to the difference between doctrine and discipline, whereas you seem to be making some suppositions that may or not be true. I am not qualified to argue with you. And don’t forget–he mentioned the natural law–so you can think about that, too

 

[godisgood77]

IMO, this needs to be answered by someone who has training in the area and really knows what they are talking about. The priest apologist seemed to give a pretty clear and simple answer as to the difference between doctrine and discipline, whereas you seem to be making some suppositions that may or not be true. I am not qualified to argue with you. And don’t forget–he mentioned the natural law–so you can think about that, too

Sorry …didn’t mean to come across as argumentative. Really just trying to learn from others and spread the God’s love. This is a topic I have been trying to study and learn about. I’ll be thinking about natural law as well…

 

[Holly3278]

Let me preface this question with two points. First, this question is hypothetical, and is NOT intended to imply anything about Pope Francis. Second, I stongly believe in all of the Church’s teachings on issues like these, so I am not questioning them at all, quite the opposite, I want to defend them.

So my understanding is that Church doctrine “cannot change” since it is part of the deposit of faith. This means that on issues like abortion, homosexuality, etc, the teachings of the Church can never change (I noticed Cardinal Dolan mentioned something about this during the conclave).

My question is, what exactly does it mean that doctrine “cannot change”? What would happen, for instance, if a Pope at some point said that abortion is now morally acceptable? What if he said it infallibly? What if the Church declared it at a Council?

My guess would be that the Pope, or Church, cannot change previously existing doctrine, so a statement that contradicts previously existing doctrine is automatically invalid.

Does anyone know?

It would be impossible for a Pope to infallibly declare that abortion is now morally acceptable. The reason is because the Holy Spirit would prevent the Pope from doing so even if that were to mean that God would take his life from him before he was able to do so. That said, abortion has always been and always will be intrinsically evil. It is utterly impossible for the doctrine that abortion is intrinsically evil to change!